Legal Opinion

Raisch v. Sanitary Dist. No. 1 of Marin County

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 29, 1952No. Civ. 14759PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGoodell, J.

This appeal is from a judgment in favor of defendants for costs after their demurrer to the amended complaint had been sustained without leave to amend.

In 1948 proceedings were commenced under the Improvement Act of 1911 (Sts. & Hy. Code, § 5000 et seq.) for the construction of a sewer system in the neighborhood of San Anselmo. The board employed respondent Oglesby as “engineer of work” on the project. The cost of the work was $150,130.92, which included $16,751.97 of incidental expenses, $10,670.31 of which represented fees paid to Oglesby in accordance with his contract with the district.…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Stockton Plumbing & Supply Co. v. WheelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  2. City & County of San Francisco v. BoydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Spring Street Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Chapman v. JocelynCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Hannon v. MaddenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Old Town Dev. Corp. v. Urban Renewal Agency of MontereyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  2. Jeffery v. City of SalinasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. Todd v. City of VisaliaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  4. Tudor v. City of RialtoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  5. Untitled California Attorney General Opinion, California Attorney General Reports1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API